I have a 49", but I'm thinking 45" is better due to the vertical height, IMO. I still miss the vertical height from my old 30" Apple Cinema Display back in the day.
That's only better if your 16:9 has higher vertical resolution than the 49"s 1440 pixels. Since the 49" is 32:9 it's the same height like 2x 16:9 screens side by side. The 5k2k screens are really the best at the moment imho
true but the 49" costs like half as much, maybe even less, right?
shouldn't we expect tradeoffs when it costs so much less?
why not compare to something just $500 less instead, like the 57" G9?
You hand wave away contrast like it is nothing. Unless you have a good mini-led backlight for your IPS, your blacks are light gray. They don't even resemble black. It makes a massive difference even in bright scenes because they often include shadows and other high contrast details that OLED just can't make that beautiful depth for.
And once you hit the 5k level resolutions the text issues are essentially gone. The stupid part is those issues have nothing even do do with the monitor they are windows godawful handing of anything other than RGB layout subpixels. And after doing the cleartype tune its a non issue.
LCD of any kind has 3 advantages.
1. It is cheap when you're comparing similar models.
2. It has better full scene brightness. The highlights are basically the same but if you need very high full scene brightness then LCD does better.
3. In theory if you really try to these days, you will still be able to get some minor burn in within a few years.
In a way I agree with you. For media and gaming, OLED is the undisputed king. For productivity with the fringing you need a literal macro lens to see and the threat of minor burn in after several years, then it is only a 8/10 where LCD can be closer to a 10.
But if you have any level of mixed use that has media and gaming anywhere above like 30% LCD is dead, being propped up by its price.
Ya i agree with basically everything except the contrast. I don't really agree with the text either, I literally need a macro photo to see any fringing at all, but you may be sensitive to it.
But the contrast you are hugely exaggerating how bad it is compared to OLED without a lot of FALDs.
[Here](https://i.imgur.com/TnDgVZi.jpeg) is a pic I took of my nice 144Hz alienware 34" IPS (non miniled) above my LG OLED. I manually adjusted the exposure so it was close to what my eyes see.
I never minded it before. I could tell it wasnt great, but you get used to stuff. But god, after the OLED I will never ever go back to a LCD panel.
I am sure windows will do better on their cleartype inmplementation soon. Mac for example has 0 fringing on text even under a microscope. It is a solved problem windows is just lagging.
But on the whole, I agree. If productivity is your main use, LCD can be a very good choice. And a high end mini-led with a good VA panel can look really nice even compared to OLED.
But an IPS wihtout mini-led unless you're full in on producitivty is dead IMO.
Can you choose this resolution natively in your OS if you only connect this monitor to your device? No.
Can you tweak your OS or driver somehow so it's possible to set this resolution? Yes. Absolutely.
5k2k resolution is not included in the EDID of the Monitor if you connect it with only one cable. So, in my definition, it's not supported out of the box.
If we agree to another definition then you might be right.
Things might also be different if we talk about PBP mode. But that's a special scenario.
achanaikia
